Lagudis v. London Assurance Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Lagudis v. London Assurance Corp.

156 P. 68, 29 Cal. App. 482, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 197

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 28, 1916

DocketCiv. No. 1753.

StatusPublished

This text of 156 P. 68 (Lagudis v. London Assurance Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lagudis v. London Assurance Corp., 156 P. 68, 29 Cal. App. 482, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 197 (Cal. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from the judgment and order denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial.

The facts in this case are in all essential particulars similar to the facts in the case of Borger v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 24 Cal. App. 696, [142 Pac. 115], and the condition of the policy of insurance sued upon, as to the time when the loss shall become payable, is identical with the terms of the policy in that case. This action was also brought prior to the time when the loss would become payable had expired, and the contention that this action was prematurely brought stands upon the threshold of this case upon appeal as in the Borger Case, and in the case of Irwin v. Insurance Co. of North America, 16 Cal. App. 143, [116 Pac. 294], to which our attention has been directed. We cannot distinguish between the facts of those prior eases and those of the case at bar, or the law applicable thereto as in said former cases laid down; and this being so, a discussion of the other questions presented upon this appeal is unnecessary at this time.

Upon the authority of Borger v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 24 Cal. App. 696, [142 Pac. 115], and Irwin v. Insurance Co. of North America, 16 Cal. App. 143, [116 Pac. 294], the judgment and order are reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from the judgment and order denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial.

The facts in this case are in all essential particulars similar to the facts in the case of Borger v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 24 Cal. App. 696, [142 Pac. 115], and the condition of the policy of insurance sued upon, as to the time when the loss shall become payable, is identical with the terms of the policy in that case. This action was also brought prior to the time when the loss would become payable had expired, and the contention that this action was prematurely brought stands upon the threshold of this case upon appeal as in the Borger Case, and in the case of Irwin v. Insurance Co. of North America, 16 Cal. App. 143, [116 Pac. 294], to which our attention has been directed. We cannot distinguish between the facts of those prior eases and those of the case at bar, or the law applicable thereto as in said former cases laid down; and this being so, a discussion of the other questions presented upon this appeal is unnecessary at this time.

Upon the authority of Borger v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 24 Cal. App. 696, [142 Pac. 115], and Irwin v. Insurance Co. of North America, 16 Cal. App. 143, [116 Pac. 294], the judgment and order are reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 P. 68, 29 Cal. App. 482, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lagudis-v-london-assurance-corp-calctapp-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack